International audienceTwo of the most notable trends in labour markets in Europe are the rise in the number of atypical job contracts (e.g. fixed-term contracts and temporary work) and the increase in job turnover. The concept of “employment vulnerability” can be used to describe these trends, which weaken the employer–employee relationship. In this article, the authors measure this employment vulnerability, for individual European countries, by creating two indices – an “employer-related vulnerability index” and a “job-related vulnerability index” – which are then aggregated to form an overall employment vulnerability index
International audienceFree Movement of people is a fundamental principle of the European Union (EU). In a context of strong divergence in employment and working conditions among EU member states, migration can be seen as a way to increase employment opportunities but also to escape from poor working conditions at home. In this article, we focus on the possible influence of employment vulnerability by comparing its individual level among migrants and native workers in EU countries. We implement propensity score matching methods using data from the European Social Survey (2008) and indexes of employment vulnerability proposed by Bazillier et al. (2014). Overall, we show that migrants face the same level of employment vulnerability than natives, all other things being equal. But there are strong differences by skill-level. Low-skilled migrants have a lower level of vulnerability mainly because of a lower level of employer vulnerability while high-skilled migrants face a higher level of vulnerability, because of a higher level of job vulnerability
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.